Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jun 18;22(1):579.
doi: 10.1186/s12967-024-05392-4.

CT-based delta-radiomics nomogram to predict pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients

Affiliations

CT-based delta-radiomics nomogram to predict pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients

Liyuan Fan et al. J Transl Med. .

Abstract

Background: This study developed a nomogram model using CT-based delta-radiomics features and clinical factors to predict pathological complete response (pCR) in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT).

Methods: The study retrospectively analyzed 232 ESCC patients who underwent pretreatment and post-treatment CT scans. Patients were divided into training (n = 186) and validation (n = 46) sets through fivefold cross-validation. 837 radiomics features were extracted from regions of interest (ROIs) delineations on CT images before and after nCRT to calculate delta values. The LASSO algorithm selected delta-radiomics features (DRF) based on classification performance. Logistic regression constructed a nomogram incorporating DRFs and clinical factors. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and area under the curve (AUC) analyses evaluated nomogram performance for predicting pCR.

Results: No significant differences existed between the training and validation datasets. The 4-feature delta-radiomics signature (DRS) demonstrated good predictive accuracy for pCR, with α-binormal-based and empirical AUCs of 0.871 and 0.869. T-stage (p = 0.001) and differentiation degree (p = 0.018) were independent predictors of pCR. The nomogram combined the DRS and clinical factors improved the classification performance in the training dataset (AUCαbin = 0.933 and AUCemp = 0.941). The validation set showed similar performance with AUCs of 0.958 and 0.962.

Conclusions: The CT-based delta-radiomics nomogram model with clinical factors provided high predictive accuracy for pCR in ESCC patients after nCRT.

Keywords: Computed tomography; Delta-radiomics; Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy; Pathological complete response.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Features selection through LASSO with a binary regression model. A The LASSO coefficient profile plot was produced against the log lambda sequence. B Tuning parameter (log lambda) selection in the LASSO via minimum criteria. AUC area under the curve
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The performances of the developed delta-radiomics signature. A Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. B Precision-recall curve (PRC)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Nomograms developed in this study using the training dataset
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
The performance of the developed nomogram. A Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. B Precision-recall curve (PRC)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Calibration curve of the nomogram shows as a red line
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
The decision of the delta-radiomics signature, nomogram and two extreme curves were plotted based on the validation dataset. The figure illustrated that the utilize of nomogram to predict pCR probability has a greater benefit that the delta-radiomics signature

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–249. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chen W, Zheng R, Baade PD, Zhang S, Zeng H, Bray F, et al. Cancer statistics in China, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(2):115–132. doi: 10.3322/caac.21338. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Arnold M, Soerjomataram I, Ferlay J, Forman D. Global incidence of oesophageal cancer by histological subtype in 2012. Gut. 2015;64(3):381–387. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308124. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Napier KJ, Scheerer M, Misra S. Esophageal cancer: a review of epidemiology, pathogenesis, staging workup and treatment modalities. World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2014;6(5):112. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v6.i5.112. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shapiro J, Van Lanschot JJB, Hulshof MC, van Hagen P, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Wijnhoven BP, et al. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for oesophageal or junctional cancer (CROSS): long-term results of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(9):1090–1098. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00040-6. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms